EPF matters order dated 30.09.2025 CGIT-1 Delhi on 30 September 2025

D-1/81/2024 M/s Centre Women’s Development Studies vs. APFC/ RPFC Delhi Central.

Present: Sh. Ashwani Singh, proxy Counsel for the Appellant.

Sh. Ajay Anand, Proxy Counsel for the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the impugned order issued on 25.10.2024 u/s 14B and 7Q of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 whereby an amount of Rs. 30,56,464/- & Rs. 21,37,469/- has been assessed by the respondent department as damages and interest respectively for the belated payment of EPF & allied dues.

Respondent has to file the reply to the stay application, however, he has not filed. Eight months have already been passed since the first hearing took place before this tribunal. In these circumstances, right to file the reply is closed. List for argument on the stay application on 16.10.2025.

D-1/82/2024 M/s Centre Women’s Development Studies vs. APFC/ RPFC Delhi Central.

Present: Sh. Ashwani Singh, proxy Counsel for the Appellant.

Sh. Ajay Anand, Proxy Counsel for the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the impugned order issued on 25.10.2024 u/s 14B and 7Q of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 whereby an amount of Rs. 6,07,822/- & Rs. 2,91,754/- has been assessed by the respondent department as damages and interest respectively for the belated payment of EPF & allied dues.

Respondent has to file the reply to the stay application, however, he has not filed. Eight months have already been passed since the first hearing took place before this tribunal. In these circumstances, right to file the reply is closed. List for argument on the stay application on 16.10.2025.

D-1/73/2019 M/s. Nice International Ltd. vs. APFC/ RPFC Delhi Central.

Present: Sh. Pradeep Pandey, ld. Counsel for the Appellant.

Sh. S.N. Mahanta, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

Ld. Counsel for the appellant has made compliance in respect of the order dated 24.07.2025 by paying the cost of Rs.3000/- with DLSA. He has also paid the cost of Rs.2000/- to the respondent. Therefore, the present appeal is restored at the same number and stage as it was before the date of dismissal due to non-prosecution.

In the meanwhile, an application has been moved by the respondent for amending the memo of parties. Though, the reason for filing of this application is that this appeal has been transferred from the jurisdiction of RPFC Delhi (South) to RPFC Delhi (Central). He has moved an application for administrative purpose amending the memo of parties which is placed on record. Office is directed to make necessary changes. Put up for arguments on 20.11.2025 as appellant prays for listing of this matter along with another appeal bearing no. D-1/36/2020 pertaining to the same establishment.

D-1/13/2024 M/s KRF Limited vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi West.

Present: Sh. Manish Malhotra, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant.

None for the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

Record perused. This appeal has been adjourned for 06.01.2026 because Sh. Sandeep Vishnu, Ld. Counsel for the respondent has sent the request of his non-availability for yesterday as well as today.

Appellant submits that he has not gone through the cause list of today where this appeal has been adjourned for 06.01.2026. He further submits that though, his application for condonation of delay was allowed by this tribunal on 05.06.2025 but it is not reflected in the order sheet. He has stated that application for condonation of delay has been filed within the extended period of limitation if the date is counted from 08.12.2023 mentioned as date of delivery to the appellant by the respondent in its reply.

I have heard the applicant/appellant. Though, in the order dated 05.06.2025 it has not been mentioned about allowing the misc. application filed for condonation of delay, however, considering the averments of the ld. Counsel for appellant as well as the reply to the said application filed on behalf of the respondent, application was deemed to be allowed on 05.06.2025. Still the reply of the application seeking stay as well as to the main appeal is not filed. Let this appeal be preponed for filing of reply on 29.10.2025. Earlier date of 06.01.2026 given by this tribunal yesterday is cancelled. Notice be issued to the respondent for appearance through email. In the meanwhile, interim order to continue till next date of hearing.

D-1/38/2024 M/s Kee Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi North.

Present: Sh. Pranav Prakash, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant.

Sh. Arvind Kumar, A/R for the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

Appellant has filed rejoinder as well as placed on record the authority letter of Rishiraj Tanwar given by the Board of Directors of the appellant establishment. The same is taken on record. Copy supplied. Pleadings are complete. The matter is listed for final arguments on 06.01.2026.

1072(4)2015 Mangalam Enterprises vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi South.

Present: None for the Appellant.

None the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

This is the case which has been remanded back by Delhi High Court for reconsideration by this tribunal. None had appeared on the last date of hearing on behalf of the appellant despite of serving the notice through post. Perusal of the record shows that the envelope has returned undelivered with a remark ‘left without any address’. Respondent counsel’s presence was marked on the last date of hearing, however today none appeared on behalf of the respondent. Let fresh notice be issued to both the parties. Put up for 03.11.2025.

980(4)2016 Signature Services Sysdicate vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi South.

Present: None for the Appellant.

None the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

This is the case which has been remanded back by Delhi High Court for reconsideration by this tribunal. One Sh. Prakash Handa had appeared on the last date of hearing on behalf of the appellant upon service of the notice. Respondent counsel’s presence was marked on the last date of hearing, however today none appeared on behalf of the respondent. Let fresh notice be issued to both the parties. Put up for 03.11.2025.

D-1/21/2022 M/s SPML Infra Ltd. Vs. EPFO Delhi East.

Present: None for the Appellant.

Sh. S.N. Mahanta, Ld. Counsel & Sh. Deepak Kumar, A/R for the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025 As per record appeal has been filed against the impugned order passed u/s 14B of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 on 17.10.2021. Since, the major amount has already been recovered by the respondent, this tribunal had restrained the respondent from recovery the balance amount of Rs.29,549/-.

Since the last several dates matter has been adjourned en-block, therefore, this tribunal was constrained to issue notice to the appellant. However, in spite of issuance of the notice to the appellant, nobody had appeared. Hence, it appears from the conduct of the appellant that he is not interested in pursuing the case considering the small amount which is to be recovered.

In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. File is consigned to record room.

D-1/54/2024 M/s Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi South.

Present: Ms. Snigdha Dash, counsel for the Appellant.

Sh. B.B. Pradhan, ld. Counsel & Sh. Ashutosh Kumar Singh, A/R for the Respondent. Order Dated-30.09.2025

Final arguments in the matter is heard and completed. Matter is reserved for order.

D-1/18/2024 M/s JSR Enterprises vs. APFC/RPFC, Delhi East & Anr.

Present: Sh. Manish Malhotra, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant.

Sh. S.N. Mahanta, ld. Counsel & Sh. Deepak Kumar, A/R for the Respondent.

Sh. Kapil Arora, Ld. Counsel for the respondent no. 2 Order Dated-30.09.2025

Final arguments in the matter is heard and completed. Matter is reserved for order.